Facing a new reality
Getting on the blue-states-loosening-maskrules bandwagon, Gov. Hochul Wednesday announced that she’s letting the state’s indoor face-covering mandate lapse. With COVID transmission and hospitalization rates way down across New York — and 82% of adults fully vaccinated, a bulwark that is likely what kept omicron from killing in far larger numbers here — the moment is right.
Meanwhile, Hochul says she’ll decide in early March whether schoolkids might get to go maskfree again. While pointing out that kids have lower vaccination rates than adults, the governor says she wants to see more data after students return from vacation. But kids are least vulnerable to COVID and their learning and emotional health are most affected by having their faces covered all day. From a public health perspective, lifting the indoor business mandate makes the school rule an easier call.
What’s likely the real reason for the governor’s hesitance is that she’s trying to manage the fears of parents and teachers, some of whom are afraid of sending kids to school naked-faced. If that’s her concern, she should say so openly.
There’s no question that masks reduce person-to-person transmission of this virus. But Hochul well understands that a sweeping requirement that all New Yorkers wear one every time they step inside a supermarket or Home Depot should be reserved for moments of genuine public health crisis.
The rise of the omicron variant was one such time, and the breaking of the wave is a responsible inflection point to flip the switch back. Demanding compliance past the point of necessity jeopardizes public trust, which will be critical the next time officials ask for cooperation to deal with another COVID variant or another virus entirely.
The other rule whose days should be numbered is the Key to NYC, requiring proof of vaccination for people to enter restaurants, theaters and more — designed as an incentive to get vaccinated. Eightyfive percent of adults in the five boroughs are fully vaxed, as are 53% of kids 5 to 17. How long can we justify excluding the others from full participation in public life, and who are we really protecting by doing so?